PC MINS 20141014 Approved 11/11/2014
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 14, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Nelson at 7:07 p.m. at the Fred
Hesse Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
FLAG SALUTE
Councilman Brian Campbell led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ATTENDANCE
Present: Commissioners Cruikshank, Emenhiser, James, Tomblin, and Vice
Chairman Nelson.
Absent: Commissioner Gerstner and Chairman Leon were excused..
Also present were Community Development Director Rojas and Deputy Community
Development Director Mihranian.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner James suggested that the Agenda be modified to hear item Nos. 4, 5,
and 3 prior to agenda item No. 2, as he will be recusing himself from agenda item No. 2.
The Commission agreed with this change.
COMMUNICATIONS
Director Rojas reported that there have been two appeals of previous Planning
Commission decisions filed with the City Council. The appeal of the Planning
Commission's denial of a Height Variation Permit on Villa Rosa Drive is tentatively
scheduled to be heard by the City Council in December, and the appeal of the Planning
Commission's approval of a Fence/Wall Permit has been tentatively scheduled to be
heard by the Council in November.
Director Rojas distributed one item of late correspondence related to agenda item No. 2.
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items):
None
CONTINUED BUSINESS
1. Golden Cove Center Master Sign Program Review Case No. ZON2010-
00104 : 31244 Palos Verdes Drive West
Director Rojas explained the applicant has not yet submitted the revised sign program.
With that, staff gave the applicant a deadline and informed the applicant that if the
revised sign program has not been submitted by that date staff will come back to the
Planning Commission with the last sign program that was submitted, and ask the
Planning Commission to make a decision based on that application.
Vice Chairman Nelson noted that he gave the owner of Golden Cove a copy of the
recently approved Terraces sign program that he felt he might use as a model on how
to do a "before" and "after" picture.
Commissioner Cruikshank moved to continue the public hearing as
recommended by staff, seconded by Commissioner James. Approved, (5-0).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4. August 12 2014 Minutes
Vice Chairman Nelson noted a typo on page 17 of the minutes.
Commissioner James moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by
Commissioner Cruikshank. Approved without objection.
5. August 26, 2014 Minutes
Vice Chairman Nelson noted a typo on page 10 of the minutes.
Commissioner Cruikshank moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded
by Commissioner James. Approved without objection.
NEW BUSINESS
3. Selection of a Planning Commissioner to the Western Avenue Design
Guidelines Steering Committee
Director Rojas explained this Steering Committee will be looking at design guidelines
and standards to help give some continuity to the Western.Avenue corridor as it
redevelops and changes. He noted that this is a joint effort with the city of Los Angeles.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 14, 2014
Page 2
Commissioner Emenhiser felt that professional expertise was needed on this
committee, and with that he recommended Commissioner Cruikshank for the
committee.
Commissioner Cruikshank accepted the nomination..
Commissioner James felt Commissioner Cruikshank would be a good choice, but also
noted that Commissioner Tomblin would be a good choice.
Director Rojas noted that this is not a formal City board, and that if the Commission felt
that it would be beneficial to have two members on the Committee, it could.
Vice Chairman Nelson moved to approve both Commissioner Tomblin and
Commissioner Cruikshank to the Western Avenue Design Guidelines Steering
Committee, seconded by Commissioner James. The motion was approved
without objection.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. LCP Amendment ZON2014-00329
Commissioner James recused himself from this item, as he lives directly across the
street from Trump National, and left the dais.
Commissioner Emenhiser disclosed that three years ago he was in a political campaign
and received a contribution from the Trump organization, however he did not feel that
would affect his decision on this subject.
Director Rojas noted that both the Vice Chairman and Commissioner Emenhiser reside
in the Coastal Zone, and this is a Local Coastal Plan amendment that affects the
coastal zone. In discussing this issue with the City Attorney, she felt that both
Commissioners can participate in this hearing because the proposal would apply
coastal zone wide and both Commissioners are far enough away that they cannot see
the Trump property.
Deputy Director Mihranian explained that the late correspondence received for this item
was from the Los Angeles County Fire Department, and pertains to the environmental
document that circulated as part of the public hearing. He noted there were no issues
identified by the Fire Department regarding the proposed amendment to the text of the
Local Coastal Plan. He gave a brief background of the flag pole at Trump National,
explaining that when the flag pole went before the Coastal Commission in July 2014 for
a Coastal Development Permit, the Coastal Commission expressed their concerns with
the City processing a Variance application to allow the flag pole since the LCP did not
allow such structures. Therefore, the Coastal Commission suggested the City go back
and reassess its Coastal Specific Plan to allow flag poles in order for the Coastal
Commission to consider it. With that, the City Council directed staff to initiate an
Planning Commission Minutes
October 14,2014
Page 3
amendment to the City's LCP to allow flag poles at 70 feet in height in the city's coastal
zone. He noted that the City Council was very specific in making sure that such a
decision and such language would pertain only to Trump National, as the Council did
not want to see a proliferation of similar flag poles along the coastal zone. He reviewed
the proposed LCP text amendment language, and explained the Planning
Commission's role in this is an advisory role and will forward a recommendation to the
City Council.
Commissioner Cruikshank referred to the parameters outlined in the staff report, and
asked staff why parameter No. 1 was not considered adequate for what is trying to be
accomplished, and why parameters 2, 3, and 4 were necessary.
Deputy Director Mihranian explained that parameter No. 2 was intended to ensure that
when staff is reviewing the request that the visual corridor component of the LCP is
factored into the decision. He explained that parameter No. 3 was included to require a
variance as the required entitlement, and that parameter No. 4 was to ensure that there
are public amenities in place as part of the flag poles installation.
Vice Chairman Nelson questioned why there was a condition included that flag pole
must be placed on City property. He questioned why the flag pole could not be placed
on property owned by Trump National.
Deputy Director Mihranian explained that it was his understanding that in 2007 when the
City Council was reviewing the application, they wanted to ensure there was some
control over what would be flown on the flag pole and how the flag pole would be used.
Requiring a flag pole to be on City property ensures such control.
Vice Chairman Nelson expressed his concern that since the flag pole is on City
property, it is conceivable that a future City Council could decide they would rather see
an eight-foot high flag pole at the site, where this wouldn't happen if the flag pole was
on the Trump National property.
Vice Chairman Nelson opened the public hearing.
Jill Martin (Trump National Gold Club) stated this flag pole received overwhelming
support when it was before the Coastal Commission, with over 800 letters of support.
With that, she felt the Coastal Commission wanted to support maintaining the flag pole
in its current position and height, however they felt there needed to be a change to the
LCP to make that happen. She appreciated the Commission considering making this
change to the LCP, and was in support of staff's recommendation. She noted that when
the City Council previously approved the flag pole there was a requirement that the
portion of the land where the flag pole existed would be granted to the City. There was
also a condition that that would be a Veteran's Memorial, and that is Trump National's
intent. She explained the Veteran's Memorial is the 70-foot tall flag pole, and hoped the
City would not reduce the height of the flag pole in the future.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 14,2014
Page 4
Commissioner Tomblin asked Ms. Martin if it was Trump National's understanding that
with the dedication of this land to the City, that it was also being dedicated as a
Veteran's Memorial.
Ms. Martin answered that was her understanding that it was to make it a Veteran's
Memorial on the Trump National property which included the 70-foot tall flag pole.
Commission Tomblin noted to staff that he did not see this language about land
dedication in what is currently before the Planning Commission.
Deputy Director Mihranian explained that requirement would be included in the
conditions of approval of a specific request. He explained the language before the
Commission is written very generically because it is in the LCP which encompasses the
entire coastline of the City.
Director Rojas added that this is an amendment to the City's LCP, and not the permit
that allows Trump National to keep the flag pole. He explained that a new Coastal
Development Permit will be issued, or the previous permit amended to allow the flag
pole to stay, and that permit will have all of the very specific conditions of approval.
Jim Sarner stated he was in favor of this flag flying over the City. He was pleased that
the City and Mr. Trump want to provide this tribute to our Country.
Eileen Hupp stated she is the President and CEO of the Palos Verdes Peninsula
Chamber of Commerce and was speaking on behalf of the nearly 400 members to
encourage the Planning Commission to vote to amend the LCP to allow the Trump
National Golf Club to continue to fly the flag. She felt the flag pole is in line with the
scale and design of the club house and is a source of pride for the community.
Mickey Rodich encouraged the Planning Commission to get this recommendation to the
City Council as soon as possible so that this can move forward and get approved. He
felt that the flag pole is a great asset to the City.
Vice Chairman Nelson closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Tomblin moved to approve staff's recommendation, seconded by
Commissioner Emenhiser.
Commissioner Emenhiser stated that from reading and listening to the public
comments, this issue is about the flag and not the pole. He congratulated the City
Council in their actions to more quickly to amend the LCP and hoped this issue would
be settled quickly.
Commissioner Cruikshank questioned the verbiage "American Flag", as he thought it
should be the "Flag of the United States of America". He noted that people in countries
outside of the United States consider themselves Americans.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 14,2014
Page 5
Director Rojas stated the language could be amended.
Commissioner Tomblin moved to amend his motion to change the language to
the Flag of the United States of America, seconded by Commissioner Emenhiser.
Vice Chairman Nelson noted that on July 4th when the City Council met there was not
unanimity on this issue, noting that Councilmembers Brooks, Misetich, and Campbell
voted in favor of the pole, and voting against it was Councilmember Knight.
The motion was approved, (4-0).
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS
6. Pre-Agenda for the meeting on October 26 2014
Director Rojas noted that the Commission's upcoming November 11th meeting is on
Veterans Day. He noted staff will be working that day and will be ready to attend the
meeting, however if the Commission has an issue with meeting on Veterans Day they
may want to consider canceling that meeting. He reviewed the items scheduled for that
meeting.
Commissioner Emenhiser felt that if possible the Commission should consider canceling
the November 11th meeting in honor of Veterans Day, and the Commissioners agreed.
With that, Director Rojas stated that an item to potentially cancel the November 11th
meeting will be an agenda item at the next Planning Commission meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 14,2014
Page 6